Supreme Court rebuffs Trump administration restrictions on medical care for transgender inmates
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to allow the Trump administration to immediately enforce new medical restrictions for transgender people in prison.
The decision leaves in place a lower-court block on the policy. It was adopted after an executive order from President Donald Trump, who has taken several steps to roll back transgender rights during his second term.
The brief order did not detail its legal reasoning. Justice Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas would have allowed the policy to be enforced as the lawsuit played out in lower courts.
The Supreme Court has previously allowed other policies for transgender people to move ahead for now, including restrictions on military service and passport sex markers.
Trump’s order called on the Bureau of Prisons to revise its medical care policies so that federal funds aren’t spent “for the purpose of conforming an inmate’s appearance to that of the opposite sex.”
The new policy would halt surgeries, taper off hormones and end social accommodations like makeup and wigs. Prisons would continue to offer mental health services.
Attorneys for transgender inmates challenged the policy in court and U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ordered treatments to continue. Lamberth, who was nominated to the bench by President Ronald Reagan, pointed out that untreated gender dysphoria can cause severe side effects like depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts.
The Trump administration appealed, arguing that treatments raised security concerns and “could no longer be justified.” A divided appeals court panel left the order in place.
About 600 inmates were receiving hormone therapy in 2025, the agency said in court records. Withdrawing care would have significant effects on their bodies and mental health, their lawyers said. The government has not detailed evidence of security problems linked to hormone therapy for transgender inmates over the 30 years it has been provided, they wrote.
The conservative-majority Supreme Court has previously upheld state laws banning certain medical treatments for transgender youth, and restricting sports participation by transgender athletes in women’s sports.
Justice Kagan warns Supreme Court rulings are fueling polarization and undermining democracy
WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Elena Kagan on Tuesday said voting and elections decisions from her conservative Supreme Court colleagues have helped make the country more politically polarized and less democratic.
In a speech two weeks before the pivotal midterm elections for control of Congress, the liberal-leaning justice sharply criticized how the majority’s rulings have affected the nation’s political environment.
“The court has kind of blinded itself to the very deleterious effect of their rulings on how the political system works and has created a democracy that does not work as well as it should,” she said during a talk before students and professors at Catholic University’s law school in Washington, D.C.
She blasted rulings that weakened the Voting Rights Act and campaign finance regulations while opening the door for more partisan gerrymandering. She dissented from those decisions.
“Over the last couple of years especially, both political parties have been engaged in a race to the bottom in terms of doing these partisan gerrymanders, … making what I think is unfortunately a too polarized country even more so,” she said. “The people of America look around and think that all this money chasing all these political candidates is a nightmare, and they’re right.”
The court’s majority, for its part, said in a 2019 ruling that courts drawing voting districts for maximum advantage is a political dispute and federal courts can’t step in. Conservatives have separately ruled that key campaign finance regulations violate the freedom of speech. This year, the court further narrowed protections in the Voting Rights Act, which had helped increase minority representation.
That helped feed a redistricting frenzy touched off by President Donald Trump, who is trying to hold on to the Republicans’ slim House majorities in the November election.
Still, Kagan said it’s unfair to say the majority reflexively supports the president. She pointed to key areas where the court has pushed back against Trump, including tariffs, birthright citizenship and mail ballots.
